'Confused' Judge Cannon needed concept explained 'slowly' to her in court by lawyers: NYT

As part of an analysis of how U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Judge Aileen Cannon, reports from her courtroom show a judge who is both "prickly" and" insecure" and often has trouble understanding what lawyers from both sides try to explain to her.

The controversial Cannon -- who has been accused of slow-walking Donald Trump's obstruction of justice trial related to his alleged illegal retention of government documents -- in recent hearings has pressed lawyers to remake their points over and over, which led to the New York Times' Alan Feuer to question whether, "she does not understand the answers she is receiving or is trying to push back against them."

Case in point, he wrote, "At last week’s hearing, she did this to Stanley Woodward Jr., Mr. Nauta’s lawyer, as she considered his request to order prosecutors to provide him with internal communications that could help support his claims that the case against his client had been brought vindictively... When Judge Cannon asked Mr. Woodward what he actually wanted from the government, his answer seemed simple enough: any messages exchanged by prosecutors that mentioned his name."

According to the NYT report, Cannon re-asked the question and requested Woodward explain his answer "slowly."

"Even after that, it seemed that she was still a bit confused," Feuer wrote, and then noted that exchange was not the only one where she seemed out of her depth based on what followed moments later.

David Harbach, one of the prosecutors, was asked to discuss Woodward's request, and had to elaborate a second time for her "But Judge Cannon seemed to miss his point," Feuer wrote before adding Harbach grew visibly frustrated when she asked him a third time, at which point Harbach "said as plainly as he could that Mr. Woodward’s request had no basis in either fact or law," before loudly stating, "This is what I’m trying to tell you."

That led to an admonishment from Cannon who warned him to “calm down.”

According to the Times report, that exchange is "emblematic" of the difficulties lawyers are having with Cannon, who is still relatively new to the bench after Donald Trump appointed her to the lifetime position.

In a fundraising email Trump’s campaign claimed, “Joe Biden was locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.” Trump was out of state when the FBI entered Mar-a-Lago. Federal agents had conferred with Secret Service, and had planned for the search warrant to be executed when the ex-president was not at the club.

Not responding to the substance of the Special Counsel’s request to order the ex-president to not make any statements that could be dangerous to law enforcement, Cannon instead rejected the motion on the grounds Smith’s attorneys should have conferred with Trump’s attorneys before making the request, as ABC News reports.

“Cannon’s wildly lawless rejection of Special Counsel Smith’s clearly correct request for a gag order against fake and dangerous claims that the FBI was ordered to assassinate him is good news,” declared University Professor Emeritus at Harvard University, Laurence Tribe, a professor of law and a top constitutional scholar who wrote a major textbook on the U.S. Constitution.

“It’s the smoking gun that will finally lead to her removal from the stolen secrets case,” Tribe added.

Not responding to the substance of the Special Counsel’s request to order the ex-president to not make any statements that could be dangerous to law enforcement, Cannon instead rejected the motion on the grounds Smith’s attorneys should have conferred with Trump’s attorneys before making the request, as ABC News reports.

“The Government moves to modify defendant Donald J. Trump’s conditions of release, to make clear that he may not make statements that pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents participating in the investigation and prosecution of this case,” federal prosecutors wrote in the filing that Cannon rejected.

While the special counsel’s prosecutors did confer with Trump’s attorney, Cannon claimed their efforts were “wholly lacking in substance and professional courtesy,” according to ABC News.

“Trump’s lawyers argued that the special counsel violated Local Rule 88.9, which says both parties must ‘meet and confer’ before filing motions so the court and the parties’ time is used efficiently. In a filing Monday, Trump’s lawyers asked Cannon to strike the special counsel’s request and impose sanctions on any prosecutors involved in filing their motion.”

Trump’s attorney had wanted to delay any meeting to confer over the issue until Monday, but federal prosecutors, concerned about Trump’s recent remarks, said they could not wait.

“As we also tried to explain earlier, our judgment was that the situation your client has created necessitated a prompt request for relief that could not wait the weekend to file,” Special Counsel prosecutor David Harbach told Trump’s lawyers via email, according to ABC News. “We understand your position and represented to the court that you do not believe the government has engaged in adequate conferral here.”